Comments on: Hasty benchmarking of various programming languages http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/ I am a Computer Science professor at UQAM: Web, OLAP, Databases, Time Series, Collaborative Filtering, Information Retrieval, e-Learning. Tue, 09 Mar 2010 21:57:58 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: anthony g http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-5529 anthony g Tue, 23 May 2006 13:54:22 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-5529 i like the analysis with the exception of highly unintelligable relative terms used in certain cases to distinguish this heirarchy of importance between languages. keep it science. performance is the topic in comparison, not relativistic personal bias. thanks again for the analysis, i got something out of it. :) i like the analysis with the exception of highly unintelligable relative terms used in certain cases to distinguish this heirarchy of importance between languages. keep it science. performance is the topic in comparison, not relativistic personal bias.

thanks again for the analysis, i got something out of it. :)

]]> By: Daniel Lemire http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-3608 Daniel Lemire Tue, 24 Jan 2006 01:54:36 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-3608 <blockquote>Daniel, you seem not to have noticed the Intel Pentium 4 measurements - we're continually re-working the website and benchmarks, so take another look, Java might look faster to you now. ; http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/</blockquote> Thanks. Java looked fast, and it still looks fast. My problem is memory usage. <blockquote> "the famous Intel C/C++ compiler is on par with GCC" The link seems to compare GNU C with Intel C++ wouldn't it be more reasonable to compare GNU C with Intel C - or GNU C++ with Intel C++ ? </blockquote> Fixed. It doesn't change the analysis. <blockquote> "PHP and Ruby are slow" Slow at what? :-) </blockquote> <code> http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=regexdna&lang=all</code> These benchmarks show Python doing very well compared to Ruby and PHP. <blockquote> Do you recognise any of the authors of the Haskell programs? Now, do you recognise any of the authors of the Java programs?</blockquote> Hmmm.... <blockquote> "Python is one of the fastest high level languages out there" Compare with Lua. Compare with Chicken Scheme. Compare with VisualWorks Smalltalk. </blockquote> Yes. There are all interesting all level languages faster than Python. <blockquote> Look at Psyco.</blockquote> Psyco looks more like an experiment at this point. -Daniel

Daniel, you seem not to have noticed the Intel Pentium 4 measurements – we’re continually re-working the website and benchmarks, so take another look, Java might look faster to you now.
;
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

Thanks. Java looked fast, and it still looks fast. My problem is memory usage.

“the famous Intel C/C++ compiler is on par with GCC”

The link seems to compare GNU C with Intel C++ wouldn’t it be more reasonable to compare GNU C with Intel C – or GNU C++ with Intel C++ ?

Fixed. It doesn’t change the analysis.

“PHP and Ruby are slow”

Slow at what? :-)

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=regexdna&lang=all

These benchmarks show Python doing very well compared to Ruby and PHP.

Do you recognise any of the authors of the Haskell programs?

Now, do you recognise any of the authors of the Java programs?

Hmmm….

“Python is one of the fastest high level languages out there”

Compare with Lua. Compare with Chicken Scheme. Compare with VisualWorks Smalltalk.

Yes. There are all interesting all level languages faster than Python.

Look at Psyco.

Psyco looks more like an experiment at this point.

-Daniel

]]> By: Isaac Gouy http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-3607 Isaac Gouy Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:43:26 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-3607 Daniel, you seem not to have noticed the Intel Pentium 4 measurements - we're continually re-working the website and benchmarks, so take another look, Java might look faster to you now. http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/ "the famous Intel C/C++ compiler is on par with GCC" The link seems to compare GNU C with Intel C++ wouldn't it be more reasonable to compare GNU C with Intel C - or GNU C++ with Intel C++ ? "PHP and Ruby are slow" Slow at what? :-) http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=regexdna&lang=all Do you recognise any of the authors of the Haskell programs? Now, do you recognise any of the authors of the Java programs? "Python is one of the fastest high level languages out there" Compare with Lua. Compare with Chicken Scheme. Compare with VisualWorks Smalltalk. Look at Psyco. Daniel, you seem not to have noticed the Intel Pentium 4 measurements – we’re continually re-working the website and benchmarks, so take another look, Java might look faster to you now.
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

“the famous Intel C/C++ compiler is on par with GCC”
The link seems to compare GNU C with Intel C++ wouldn’t it be more reasonable to compare GNU C with Intel C – or GNU C++ with Intel C++ ?

“PHP and Ruby are slow”
Slow at what? :-)
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=regexdna&lang=all

Do you recognise any of the authors of the Haskell programs?
Now, do you recognise any of the authors of the Java programs?

“Python is one of the fastest high level languages out there”
Compare with Lua. Compare with Chicken Scheme. Compare with VisualWorks Smalltalk.
Look at Psyco.

]]> By: Ronnie http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-3590 Ronnie Sun, 15 Jan 2006 01:17:31 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-3590 Also, whether a language A is truly faster than a language B depends on the developer. In Python, for instance, there are several constructs for creating loops, such as list comprehension, the map function, the for loops, and I suppose a recursive function is also an alternative. But which of these provide the best performance (in the given situation)? The answer might not always be intuitive to the developer and hence, in reality, the result of benchmarking depends a great deal on the developer's ability to avoid common pitfalls of the language. Also, whether a language A is truly faster than a language B depends on the developer. In Python, for instance, there are several constructs for creating loops, such as list comprehension, the map function, the for loops, and I suppose a recursive function is also an alternative.

But which of these provide the best performance (in the given situation)? The answer might not always be intuitive to the developer and hence, in reality, the result of benchmarking depends a great deal on the developer’s ability to avoid common pitfalls of the language.

]]> By: Michael Stiber http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-3578 Michael Stiber Thu, 12 Jan 2006 07:38:43 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-3578 Another lesson is that the managed, JIT-compiled languages produce programs that take a <i>long</i> time to start up. I would say that this argues <i>against</i> using them for small, interactive applications in which startup time is more of an issue. Of course, if you can precompile the program ahead of time to native code... Another lesson is that the managed, JIT-compiled languages produce programs that take a long time to start up. I would say that this argues against using them for small, interactive applications in which startup time is more of an issue. Of course, if you can precompile the program ahead of time to native code…

]]> By: Parand Tony Darugar http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-3577 Parand Tony Darugar Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:23:49 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-3577 If I'm reading this right the benchmark's on the AMD Sempron, so the Intel compiler vs. GCC comparison may not apply. I doubt Intel has optimized their compiler for AMD. If I’m reading this right the benchmark’s on the AMD Sempron, so the Intel compiler vs. GCC comparison may not apply. I doubt Intel has optimized their compiler for AMD.

]]> By: Robin http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-3576 Robin Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:02:33 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-3576 Merci, that's easy enough to read. Of course, there is always the <a href='http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/debian/benchmark.php?test=nsieve&lang=all' rel="nofollow">The Computer Language Shootout (nsieve example)</a> if you're looking for more numbers. Merci, that’s easy enough to read. Of course, there is always the The Computer Language Shootout (nsieve example) if you’re looking for more numbers.

]]> By: Kunal http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/archives/2006/01/09/574/comment-page-1/#comment-3575 Kunal Tue, 10 Jan 2006 05:03:38 +0000 http://www.daniel-lemire.com/blog/?p=574#comment-3575 Daniel, cheers for putting this together! I was planning on doing this sometime soon, but you've taken all the work out of it. Daniel, cheers for putting this together! I was planning on doing this sometime soon, but you’ve taken all the work out of it.

]]>